Much ink has been spilled about the school anti-testing bills passed by the 2013 Texas Legislature during its regular session. Ditto for legislators’ easing of some high school graduation requirements.

At the center of these debates has been a contest between two distinct approaches to education. Deeply held beliefs and moral conviction have driven both sides down very different paths.

One side was led by Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock, R-Killeen, and Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, who chaired the Legislature’s education committees. Their camp, which included numerous Texas superintendents, educator groups and suburban parents, contended that states are testing kids too much and that test preparation is eating away at core instruction.

The state puts too much emphasis on preparing kids for college, this group said. Its advocates, including 2014 GOP gubernatorial hopeful Tom Pauken, think the focus on college drives some kids to quit school. They contend that states like Texas should concentrate more on getting kids ready for a good job after high school.

The other side was led by Bill Hammond of the Texas Association of Business, legislators such as Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin, former Dallas school board president Sandy Kress and organizations such as the National Council of La Raza. They believe kids are better served by states testing them annually and using that information to intervene with students and schools.

Schools should set expectations for some education beyond high school, this group said. It presented data showing students with at least some college have greater economic and social mobility.

Now with the session over, it is clear which side won: those who believe Texas is testing too much and focusing too much on college.

HB 5, the session’s main education bill, leaned heavily in their direction. So did HB 866, legislation that would let some students get out of testing in grades three through eight, assuming Washington agrees.

Gov. Rick Perry vetoed HB 2824, an anti-testing bill, but it was limited to about two dozen school districts, so the impact was muted. The system now belongs to the too-much-testing folks. They need to own it.

At the same time, the business executives, minority leaders, philanthropic foundations and education reformers who make up the pro-testing group need to do a big rethink. That includes me.

We need to rethink how we make concepts like school accountability and college-prep education relevant to students and their families. Here’s where I would suggest we start:

We have made accountability sound too much like a game of gotcha. We must be clearer with the message that holding schools responsible provides children with great advantages. For example, if schools are not keeping their students’ mastery of academics at grade level or moving them toward it, accountability is how students instead get new teachers, principals and interventions to move them ahead.

That’s really the premise of the No Child Left Behind Act and similar state accountability laws. States that see schools failing or districts that discover teachers are not sufficiently moving their kids ahead must improve their work or face consequences.

Since the nation started this system of “consequential accountability” in the 1990s, test scores have improved, especially for minority students. As one example, results from National Assessment of Educational Progress exams show black and Latino 9-year-olds increasing their reading scores by 21 percent and 14 percent, respectively, from 1999 through 2008. That translated into about two years of academic growth for the black students and a year and a half for the Latinos.

Unfortunately, the benefits for students stopped being the focus over the last decade. Popular phrases like “teaching to the test” and “high-stakes testing” captured the public’s attention. Those of us in the accountability camp started to sound like scolds when preaching our gospel of measuring students.

We should keep extolling testing, but we need to convey that tests are a way to help students and schools. They show a way forward for both individuals and campuses. We want that as a society, don’t we?

Accountability has too often been framed in a way that made it sound important only for poor students in poor schools. The fact is that it’s significant for wealthier, suburban schools as well — the same campuses that helped spark the revolution against testing.

That may be a surprise to some suburban parents who think their schools don’t have to worry about annual measurements. That’s not always the case. For example, the George W. Bush Institute’s Global Report Card shows that only two Texas districts — Highland Park and Carroll — were among America’s top 100 in a comparison of math achievement across the nation and with our economic peers around the world.

In other words, many Texas suburban school districts that are touting their progress may not look so good when compared with others around the globe and nation. They could benefit from annual assessments that show where students could improve.

My side also needs to concentrate more on the quality of instruction. If most kids in a class are “waking up sick” on the morning of the test, the class clearly has not been taught well; if they knew the material, they would be far less likely to fear the test.

There are several ways to go here. Former Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, worked in the 2011 Legislature on reforms such as greater mentoring of new teachers and the crafting by principals and educators on career plans so teachers don’t feel stuck. Shapiro’s bill died, and the 2013 session took only a small bite out of this apple, so there is room to come back in the 2015 Legislature with more ways to help build up teachers.

This focus should include continual reviews of how well Texas colleges are preparing future educators. At the local level, it means making sure principals are monitoring teachers so they stick to the curriculum. Also, we should be encouraging concerned parents, business executives and minority leaders to back up school trustees when they make the call to remove underperforming educators.

The role of minority leaders is key to improving the accountability camp’s message. No Child was passed with the help of interest groups like the National Council of La Raza and Education Trust. In one way or another, these groups advocate for poor and minority students, particularly Latinos.

Fortunately, some of them spoke up as the Legislature considered HB 5 and other bills this year. They especially opposed any hint of change that could lead minority students to a less rigorous academic track in high school. I heard from several minority parents during the debate, all of them expressing their worries about the path that Texas was heading down.

In the future, the accountability movement needs these voices to become even more prominent. Public education in Texas for the next 30 years will largely be about educating Hispanic children. They make up more than half the Texas student body, including almost 70 percent in the Dallas school district. Leaders from the Hispanic community must become as effective advocates as the white suburban parents who think their kids are doing well enough that they don’t need annual testing.

The accountability movement also should zero in on the link between results and spending. In short, what are schools producing for the money being put in them? One way to get a good handle on this is to measure outcomes of comparable schools. If a school with a particular demographic profile and level of spending is producing X results and a similar campus is producing Y results, why is that latter campus behind?

And last, we must find a better way to promote the value of college education. The college emphasis can come across as elitism when it actually is about mobility for students. They are likely to be in the workforce a long time, so they need skills that will require them to keep reinventing themselves.

Our side needs to make moms and dads more aware that the economy is changing so fast that their children could be left behind if the state and school districts don’t keep pressing them ahead academically. We need to keep opening the window so that all of us can get a better glimpse of the future. We won’t get there if we approach education as if this is about 1958 Texas.

The other side needs to take responsibility as well. That includes making sure that these classes preparing students for a trade job are relevant and compelling.

That said, my side needs to rethink its approach, too. Who knows? Maybe the two sides can come back in two years with a joint effort, like working on creating serious vocational education courses and more funds for college scholarships.

We have different approaches but the same goal: We both want Texas to succeed.

Dallas Morning News editorial columnist William McKenzie can be reached at wmckenzie@dallasnews.com. He moderates the Texas Faith blog at dallasnews.com/texasfaith and contributes to the Education Blog. Follow him on Twitter @bill_mckenzie.

To post a comment, log into your chosen social network and then add your comment below. Your comments are subject to our Terms of Service and the privacy policy and terms of service of your social network. If you do not want to comment with a social network, please consider writing a letter to the editor.

About William McKenzie

Bill joined The News in 1991, after spending 12 years in the wilds of Washington, D.C. The University of Texas grad worked there for 1980 presidential candidate John Anderson and then edited the Ripon Forum. Texas drew Bill back home to join the editorial board, where he writes editorials and a weekly column. The Fort Worth native spearheaded the launch of Texas Faith, a weekly online discussion about religion, politics and culture. He has followed George W. Bush closely and extensively covered Texas politics and the state's water needs. He and his wife are raising enthusiastic twins.

Hometown: Fort Worth, Texas

Education: The University Of Texas, bachelor of business administration, 1976